4
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Any Photographers Here on TB? Lens Suggestions for Nikon Welcome
Posted on 9/29/26 at 11:44 am
Posted on 9/29/26 at 11:44 am
I shot with a D750 for years & sold it and my lenses earlier in the year because I wanted to finally go mirrorless. So, my Z9 just arrived.
I'm most likely going to rent a couplish lenses to figure out what I want to get. Since it'll be my primary/sole lens for a little while, at least a few months, I need to get something that's versatile. I had the Tamron G2 "trinity" with my D750. I'm currently contemplating the Nikon Z 24-120 S, Nikon Z 24-70 2.8 S I, or the Tamron 35-150 2-2.8. The Tamron 28-75 2.8 could also be interesting, but I haven't had a chance to look into that one yet.
I shot mostly city/landscapes, often at night, as well as storm photography with my D750. But I'd like to get into more urban/street photography, candid photos, maybe portraits. I'll go ahead & summarize what I've heard for the 3 lenses I'm considering.
24-120 F4 - lens is amazing, much sharper than one might think, is lighter, and offers great versatility. Pretty awesome across the board, just wouldn't be able to go to 2.8 if I wanted/needed to.
24-70 2.8 S I - as lose to optical perfection as one can get, covers wide at 24mm, you might feel the lack of reach with it being capped at 70mm. Only real weakness is lack of reach.
35-150 2-2.8 - Incredibly sharp, great for portraits & events. Weakness is weight & maybe AF speed.
I'm thinking if I go with the 24-70 I could grab an 85 1.8/1.2 S (can't remember if the 85mm has 1.2, know it's offered at 1.8) to supplement the lack of reach. I could also get a wide prime to supplement the Tamron. The 24-120 I could probably just use without needing to swap lenses for a while.
Shooting a lot in the evening & nighttime, speed & aperture are important to me. Especially with my interest in street shots & candid portraits. At the same time, most of my previous work was probably shot at f/8 - f/14. I am interested in trying astrophotography, but that's probably a whole other discussion.
That's about it, anybody have some suggestions...even if you're not a Nikon shooter?
TLDR - Finally went mirrorless, grabbed a Z9, asking for lens advice.
Appreciate any help!
I'm most likely going to rent a couplish lenses to figure out what I want to get. Since it'll be my primary/sole lens for a little while, at least a few months, I need to get something that's versatile. I had the Tamron G2 "trinity" with my D750. I'm currently contemplating the Nikon Z 24-120 S, Nikon Z 24-70 2.8 S I, or the Tamron 35-150 2-2.8. The Tamron 28-75 2.8 could also be interesting, but I haven't had a chance to look into that one yet.
I shot mostly city/landscapes, often at night, as well as storm photography with my D750. But I'd like to get into more urban/street photography, candid photos, maybe portraits. I'll go ahead & summarize what I've heard for the 3 lenses I'm considering.
24-120 F4 - lens is amazing, much sharper than one might think, is lighter, and offers great versatility. Pretty awesome across the board, just wouldn't be able to go to 2.8 if I wanted/needed to.
24-70 2.8 S I - as lose to optical perfection as one can get, covers wide at 24mm, you might feel the lack of reach with it being capped at 70mm. Only real weakness is lack of reach.
35-150 2-2.8 - Incredibly sharp, great for portraits & events. Weakness is weight & maybe AF speed.
I'm thinking if I go with the 24-70 I could grab an 85 1.8/1.2 S (can't remember if the 85mm has 1.2, know it's offered at 1.8) to supplement the lack of reach. I could also get a wide prime to supplement the Tamron. The 24-120 I could probably just use without needing to swap lenses for a while.
Shooting a lot in the evening & nighttime, speed & aperture are important to me. Especially with my interest in street shots & candid portraits. At the same time, most of my previous work was probably shot at f/8 - f/14. I am interested in trying astrophotography, but that's probably a whole other discussion.
That's about it, anybody have some suggestions...even if you're not a Nikon shooter?
TLDR - Finally went mirrorless, grabbed a Z9, asking for lens advice.
Appreciate any help!
Posted on 9/29/26 at 1:11 pm to Tom288
quote:
I shot mostly city/landscapes, often at night
You need to go get 3 lenses:
24-70mm f/2.8 — This would be your everyday/workhorse lens. 24mm is wide enough for most city scenes and environmental shots, while 50–70mm gives you enough reach for details, candids and tighter compositions. The f/2.8 is especially useful at night when you don't want to immediately have to go to a tripod or crank the ISO.
14-24mm f/2.8 — For cityscapes and landscapes, especially at night, I'd consider this, 14mm gives you a dramatically wider perspective for architecture, streets, large buildings and foreground-to-background compositions. The 2.8 also gives you some flexibility for handheld nighttime shooting and is useful for astrophotography if you decide to get into that. My Zeiss 16-35mm was my go to when I was shooting landscapes.
50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 — This is the lens I'd add specifically for the nighttime street/candid/portrait side of what you're describing. A fast 50mm gives you 1–2+ stops more light than an f/2.8 zoom, along with much better subject separation. It's also small and relatively unobtrusive for street photography. If you want to emphasize portraits and low-light shooting, I'd lean toward the 1.4; otherwise the 1.8 is a great choice.
For what you described, those three would cover an enormous amount of ground. I'd estimate 95%+ of your shooting would be covered between them.
Then I'd add a 70-200mm f/2.8 later to round out the kit. That gives you the compression and reach for portraits, details, distant city subjects and events without giving up the low-light capability of the rest of the kit.
ETA: Check out MTB.com for used lenses. I've used them many times and only 1 time did I get a lens\camera that didn't live up to my expectations. They took it back without question. They even paid for return shipping on that one.
This post was edited on 9/29/26 at 1:20 pm
Posted on 9/29/26 at 1:22 pm to Tom288
I also shot with the D750 for ages and still have all the equipment available. I had the 24-120 F4 for the D750 and liked the versatility and weight. As you mentioned, the reviews of the new Z version say it's much improved. The advantage is weight and extended focal range over the 24-70 F2.8. With IBS of the Z9 or any mirrorless camera, the difference between f4 and f2.8 isn't that big of an issue, unless you shoot a lot of shallow depth of field pictures (portraits). I just saw a YouTube review of the Tamron 35-150 by Mads Peter Iversen, where he reviewed the Tamron lens and compared to other lens he uses. He a landscape photographer. His take was that the lens was very sharp, but the range just didn't fit his needs. He would rather have a lens that went to 24-28mm and didn't really need the extra weight associated with low F-stops (a lot of time he's backpacking).
If I had stayed with Nikon when I switched to mirrorless earlier this year, I would have gone with the 24-120 f4. Instead, I decided I was tired of carring all that weight around and switched to OM Systems OM-1 Mak II.
If I had stayed with Nikon when I switched to mirrorless earlier this year, I would have gone with the 24-120 f4. Instead, I decided I was tired of carring all that weight around and switched to OM Systems OM-1 Mak II.
Posted on 9/29/26 at 10:40 pm to Tom288
quote:The Z9 is phenomenal but it’s a pretty conspicuous camera for this kind of stuff. I don’t live in the city so I don’t do street photography but if I did I’d probably go with the 40 f/2. I have a ZF that it lives on and I like the focal length. It’s not very sharp wide open but it’s sharp enough when you stop it down like you would for street photography. I only own a ZF at all because the Canon cameras I have are…very camera-y. I can take the ZF into arenas and stadiums for stuff like monster jam with the kids and no one cares. I have the 40 f/2 and a Viltrox 85 f/2 that’s quite good for what it costs. I think a 35 or 40 plus an 85 will get you almost all the way there for what you’re shooting.
But I'd like to get into more urban/street photography, candid photos
Edited to add a shot from both lenses:
Viltrox 85 f/2
Nikon 40 f/2
This post was edited on 9/30/26 at 9:48 am
Posted on 9/30/26 at 7:49 am to SneakyWaff1es
Yeah, zooms and bigger bodies make people uncomfortable for street shots. When I go on the street with my digital, I'll throw on a small prime. It makes people feel less like your "snooping." I'd love to take my Sigma 17-40, but it's hefty and makes it look like a bigger zoom than it actually is. Instead, I'll usually take my 24 f/1.8 or 28 f/2.8 prime (I'm on an APS-C).
Posted on 9/30/26 at 8:38 am to Tom288
Posted on 9/30/26 at 10:07 am to Tiger503
I had to laugh when he said "the wrist gets a little bit tired with the 35mm f/1.4. I spent a whole day this past weekend (from 6:45 until 2:30 PM) shooting mountain bike racing with a 3.5 lb 70-400mm on a full frame body. Just my lens weighs more than his entire setup... 
Posted on 9/30/26 at 10:42 am to Lonnie Utah
He’s a weird guy.
Posted on 9/30/26 at 11:02 am to SneakyWaff1es
quote:
He’s a weird guy.
I would say that's a bit of an understatement.
Riding around on a skateboard to do street photography is an interesting choice to say the least. But hey, it works for him so who am I to judge?
This post was edited on 9/30/26 at 11:07 am
Posted on 9/30/26 at 12:53 pm to Lonnie Utah
Appreciate the advice, guys! I realize the Z9 is bulky for candid portrait stuff and I was heavily debating between it and the Z8. But when I'm out I tend to stay out for a while, like I was shooting lightning shots downtown months ago from 8pm - 3am. Same at the beach. So I like having the extra battery & the extra CF card. I'm still at the "I'd like to try" stage so it's not like street photography & candid shots are 50%+ of my workflow.
I have heard good news, cool stuff, about the Viltrox lenses and might check them out.
I need to see how the new Tamron lenses for the Z mount are. I really liked the G2 "trinity" set that I had.
I have heard good news, cool stuff, about the Viltrox lenses and might check them out.
I need to see how the new Tamron lenses for the Z mount are. I really liked the G2 "trinity" set that I had.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News